Video Link: http://tinyurl.com/mwoqs3d On Monday, a judge ordered three paint companies to pay $1.1 billion to remove lead-based paint in California homes in several jurisdictions, including Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego, marking the end to a case that took 13 years to litigate. According to the LA Times, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James P. Kleinberg ruled that ConAgra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams had exposed children to a known poison for decades when they sold lead-based paint for use in homes before it was outlawed in 1977 and created a “public nuisance” by their actions. Public health historians Gerald Markowitz and David Rosner mentioned the trial to Bill earlier this year on Moyers & Company noting that a decision against the companies would mark only the second time in history that the industry has been compelled to pay for clean-up. A similar decision in 2006 in Rhode Island was later overturned by that state’s Supreme Court. Markowitz and Rosner warned that, for young children, there’s no safe level of exposure to this dangerous toxin still lurking in millions of homes across the country. In the California ruling, the judge wrote, “The court is convinced there are thousands of California children in the Jurisdictions whose lives can be improved, if not saved through a lead abatement plan.” The LA Times reports that nearly 5 million homes in the 10 cities and counties that joined the lawsuit could require abatement. Many of... |
Copyright
(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label Santa Clara County Superior Court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Santa Clara County Superior Court. Show all posts
Sunday, December 22, 2013
Judge Orders Companies to Pay $1.1 Billion for Lead Paint Removal
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Closing arguments in Calif. lead paint trial take place Monday
In the high stakes lead paint public nuisance case culminating in Santa Clara County Superior Court, both sides will make closing arguments Monday before Judge James Kleinberg. The 10 city and county plaintiffs — Santa Clara County, San Francisco City, Alameda County, Los Angeles County, Monterey County, Oakland City, San Diego City, San Mateo County, Solano County and Ventura County — are expected to argue they have met a burden of proving their case by a preponderance of evidence. Among other things, a team of attorneys for the plaintiffs will argue that the five defendant companies knew or should have known about the hazards created by the use of lead paint in homes, but promoted it anyway. They seek abatement in approximately 500,000 pre-1978 built homes in the jurisdictions and estimate the cost at $1.6 billion for inspection and abatement if the public entities implement the program. Plaintiffs say it would cost $2.4 billion if implemented by the defendants. Their plan calls for the creation of a fund administered by the public entities. Defendant companies — Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries, ConAgra Grocery Products, DuPont and Atlantic Richfield Company — are expected to fiercely defend their position, saying plaintiffs did not meet a necessary test set forth by the state’s Sixth District Court of Appeal. The paint companies will argue that the Sixth District allowed the 13-year-old case... |
Related articles
- Plaintiffs in Calif. lead paint case say companies' witnesses were 'not persuasive' (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Sides rest in Calif. lead paint trial (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs' expert in lead paint trial says industry took responsibility for public health (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lots of data to process for Calif. lead paint judge (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Calif. judge denies Sherwin Williams motion in lead paint trial (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Plaintiffs' expert says lead paint abatement could cost $1.4 billion (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Lead paint manufacturers facing California challenge (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)